“…first, that the Holy Ghost is God, otherwise we might not beleeve in him. Secondly, that he is a distinct person from the Father, and the Sonne…and thirdly, that he proceedeth from the Father, and the Sonne, infolded in the Title, Holy Ghost. For albeit the Father is holy, the Sonne holy; the Father a Spirit, and the Sonne a Spirit, in respect to their nature; yet onely the third person is the Holy Spirit, in regard to his office. The holy, because beside the holinesse of nature, his special office is to make the Church holy…Againe, the third person is termed the Spirit, not only in regard to his nature, which is spirituall; but because he is spired, or breathed from the Father and the Sonne: in that he proceeds from them both. How, I cannot say, you need not search, only beleeve.”
John Boys, The Workes of John Boys, Doctor in Divinitie and Deane of Canterburie, London: Imprinted for William Aspley, 1622, p. 23.
I have scanned some of the writing of John Boys (1571-1625), an Anglican cleric who preached in the end of the 16th century and into the first quarter of the 17th century. Brett Mahlen pointed out to me an idea posited by Boys, that the difference between choosing using Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost in the English Bible is a difference of emphasis (as one word is used in the original languages; Hebrew ruah and Greek pneuma). “Holy Ghost emphasizes his name and identity, but Spirit emphasizes his procession (spiration) from the Father and the Son.” Brett felt that, on inspection, this distinction generally fits the way “Holy Ghost” and “Holy Spirit” are found in the King James translation. I think this is interesting enough to pass along to my readers.
No comments:
Post a Comment